Warfarin Therapy and Risk of Hip Fracture Among Elderly Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the relationship between warfarin therapy and subsequent hip fracture in a large elderly population. DESIGN: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. SETTING: Population-based health care administrative databases for Ontario, Canada. PATIENTS: Elderly patients receiving warfarin (52,701 patients), thyroid replacement therapy (40,555), an oral corticosteroid (43,915), or a proton pump inhibitor (60,383). The proton pump inhibitor group served as controls. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The association between warfarin therapy and subsequent hospitalization for hip fracture in elderly patients was examined by researching administrative data from January 1, 1994-March 31, 1999, for the elderly population of Ontario. Relative to patients receiving proton pump inhibitors, patients receiving warfarin (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-1.09) or thyroid replacement therapy (aRR 1.02, 95% Cl 0.89-1.18) incurred similar risks of hip fracture. As expected, patients receiving oral corticosteroids incurred an increased risk (aRR 1.44, 95% CI 1.21-1.70) relative to patients receiving proton pump inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Warfarin was not associated with increased risk of hip fracture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".